By Pat Burns, President
Some of you may remember that I wrote an editorial about our roads back in June of 2025. I decided to dig deeper and what I found raised more questions.
How bad do our roads have to become before we finally demand answers?
Here in Sonoma County, some roads are not just rough or inconvenient; they are becoming dangerous. But every time we fill our vehicles with fuel, we pay taxes that are supposed to help fund transportation. So where is the money going?
In fiscal year 2024-25, California collected approximately $9.42 billion in gasoline and diesel fuel-tax revenue: $7.94 billion from gasoline and $1.48 billion from diesel. That money doesn’t all go directly to paving roads; it gets distributed among state and local transportation programs and other legally designated purposes.
But that brings up a reasonable question: How much of the money we pay actually reaches the pavement beneath our tires, and where does the rest go?
Look at Highway 101 between Airport Boulevard and Steele Lane. The southbound lanes have deteriorated to the point that driving them is hard on our vehicles and dangerous. Deep ruts and uneven pavement force drivers back and forth through the lanes.
I’ve heard people say it’s because of truck traffic. Trucks certainly take a toll on pavement, but is that the entire explanation? We shouldn’t guess. We should ask Caltrans for the engineering data.
Caltrans records identify a major project on Highway 101 between Steele Lane and Windsor River Road that included widening the highway, constructing sound walls, and replacing concrete pavement back in 2010. It had a $120.26 million budget. So, what happened? What treatment was used on the Airport Boulevard-to-Steele Lane section? What was its expected lifespan? Was it designed for the traffic it gets? How much maintenance has been performed since the project was completed? Most importantly: Why is this pavement in the condition it is today? These are questions we as taxpayers have a right to ask.
Here’s another question. Caltrans records show that $3.314 million was actually spent on the environmental phase of this Highway 101 project, which had $3.5 million budgeted for environmental work. That $3.314 million represents nearly 3% of the project’s $120.26 million budget. What did we receive for $3.314 million in environmental work? What issues were identified? What changed because of those studies? And how much time did that process add to the project? I’m not saying environmental protections are unnecessary; some are important, and some are legally required. Those are reasonable questions, especially when we’re dealing with an existing highway that has been in place for decades.
Caltrans has a pavement-management system called PaveM that uses pavement history, current condition, traffic, climate, and programmed projects to predict future conditions and recommend repairs while considering funding constraints. Caltrans also collects pavement-condition data across the state highway system. So, let’s see the data. Caltrans currently lists another pavement project for the Steele Lane-to-Windsor Undercrossing corridor in its 2029/30 program. When did Caltrans’ system identify this section as needing significant rehabilitation? When did it become a priority? Who decided it could wait? How long does Caltrans know a road needs significant rehabilitation before the money is actually allocated to fix it? Who makes that decision?
This isn’t just about Highway 101. Drive through Healdsburg, Santa Rosa, or Petaluma. Look at the condition of many of our local streets. The county and our cities have their own responsibility for maintaining the roads under their jurisdiction.
Sonoma County maintains more than 1,300 miles of roads, and keeping that system maintained is a tremendous responsibility. But taxpayers are already paying for it. We pay fuel taxes. We pay vehicle registration fees. We pay local taxes, assessments, and other transportation-related charges. State and federal transportation dollars also flow into our counties and cities.
Now, Californians are being asked to approve additional taxes. Before the state, county, or our cities ask us for more, shouldn’t we be able to follow the money we already provide?
How much is spent on planning, engineering, environmental review, mitigation, and administration? How are road projects prioritized? Who decides which roads get fixed and which continue to deteriorate?
When a major road project is completed, who is responsible for making sure the pavement performs as expected?
Those aren’t unreasonable questions. They are questions about accountability.
I don’t expect perfect roads, but I do expect better roads for the amount of money we pay. Weather, traffic, and time all take their toll. I understand that major transportation projects are complicated and expensive.
Where did the money go? Who made the decisions? What did we get for it? And why are we still driving on roads like these?
As taxpayers, we deserve answers.
